[ncc-services-wg] 2013-04 New Policy Proposal (Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members)

> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 04:57:33PM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> Please read the legal statement from the NCC I linked to. You are
>> contradicting it. If you have better legal advice than the RIPE NCC's
>> own lawyers then please contact the NCC.
> 
> I *have* taken legal advice and it does not contradict the NCC statement
> at all.
> According to Regulation 44/2001 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32001R0044:EN:NOT
> a judgment from a member state must be declared enforceable in the
> member state where it applies. This is pretty automatic, certainly not
> very complicated. Once the declaration of exequatur is issued, it'll
> have the same force as a dutch judgment which the NCC will (must) comply with.
> Note this is civil law, not criminal.

I just read the Regulation you mentioned but I fail to see how this would even apply to anything mentioned in this discussion...

>> Ah, ok. But since your assumption is invalid (there is no default, and
>> the quick-start examples which would probably be used for such a "lazy
>> default" are completely different from what you assume) then your case
>> isn't very interesting to discuss any further.
> 
> There may not be a default *yet*, but there will be and it will be "drop
> if invalid/missing" because that is much easier to understand ifor the
> decision-makers than localprefs, metrics, etc. 

Ok, now you are making even more unfounded assumptions. Please stop that.
Sander